Fake News Reporting Thread

[Kidlicious]

Considering my degree in Biology, I am surely more qualified to make educated guesses about natural sciences than Trump.

Even more so as in the 1.5 years of his presidency he has shown ample proof that his relationship to science is similar to the relationship of a dyslexic to written texts

He knows more than you. Sounds like you didn't learn much. I learned more about fires in the US Navy.

[Kidlicious]

FYI: Dead dry leaves burn. Did they teach you that in biology?

[Proteus_MST]

FYI: Dead dry leaves burn. Did they teach you that in biology?

Ever heard about the ecogical impact of
1. Leaves on the ground
2. Fire on the rejuvenation of forests (especially in forests that are adapted to periodic forest fires)

Probably not ... and I guess neither has Trump, which is why he just comes with statements that are as idiotic (and as revealing to his lack of ecological knowledge) as hsi statement regarding the water in the californian rivers

Also ... if you want the californian forest management to implement more effective measures to prevent the spread of forest fires, then pay for it (i.e. federal funds) ... it surely won't be cheap ... and Trump wants to cut all funds in order to be able to fund his tax reductions for the rich, so we have a certain conflict of inteests here

[Kidlicious]

Ever heard about the ecogical impact of
1. Leaves on the ground
2. Fire on the rejuvenation of forests (especially in forests that are adapted to periodic forest fires)

Probably not ... and I guess neither has Trump, which is why he just comes with statements that are as idiotic (and as revealing to his lack of ecological knowledge) as hsi statement regarding the water in the californian rivers

Also ... if you want the californian forest management to implement more effective measures to prevent the spread of forest fires, then pay for it (i.e. federal funds) ... it surely won't be cheap ... and Trump wants to cut all funds in order to be able to fund his tax reductions for the rich, so we have a certain conflict of inteests here

They don't deserve funding if it doesn't do any good, because they don't even clean up dead leaves.

And you just admitted that not raking leaves causes fires.

[Proteus_MST]

They don't deserve funding if it doesn't do any good, because they don't even clean up dead leaves.

And you just admitted that not raking leaves causes fires.

Wrong ... sparks (for example by badly maintained eletrical lines) cause fire ... thrown away burning cigarettes cause fire ... leaves by themselves don't cause fire

And if you don't pay money, you don't get any performance.
That's the problem with you Trumpists ... you cut all funds (so that rich people don't have to pay any taxes) and then expect the government servikces to run as smoothly as they would, if trhey were amply funded.

Tip:
This may work in one of Trumps alternate universes, but not in the real one

[Kidlicious]

What?! Sparks cause fires when they catch dry leaves on fire! You study biology?!

[Aeson]

If you don't manage your grasslands you are going to have a bad fire like those idiots in California.

Im turning our grasslands into forests so they won’t burn. I probably won’t rake them.

I dont have the right to manage someone elses forests or grasslands without their consent.

Youre hilariously missing why Trumps rake comments were absurd. Finns don’t rake their forests, because that would be stupid. The climate difference with California make fires much less of a concern.

[Aeson]

The manpower required to rake the millions of acres of forests is also absurd. It would also be a fire (and forest health) problem in and of itself as forests would dry out faster with no mulch.

[Aeson]

It does make sense to manage forests, clear out deadwood periodically ... but such takes funding, and using a rake for that sort of work is absurdly stupid.

[Kidlicious]

It does make sense to manage forests, clear out deadwood periodically ... but such takes funding, and using a rake for that sort of work is absurdly stupid.

It's the principle. If you don't take up dead leaves then you probably aren't going to do the harder work especially when you get paid for your failure.

[Kidlicious]

Im turning our grasslands into forests so they won’t burn. I probably won’t rake them.

I dont have the right to manage someone elses forests or grasslands without their consent.

Youre hilariously missing why Trumps rake comments were absurd. Finns don’t rake their forests, because that would be stupid. The climate difference with California make fires much less of a concern.

That depends on how much combustible materials they leave around. Californians can not blame their failure on the climate.

[Aeson]

Leaves are not the problem, having a good leaf (or needle) layer is important for the forest health. Without them the trees would dry out much faster, erosion would increase, soil fertility would decrease, and even short dry spells would be prone to disaster.

In any case you’re still missing the ridiculousness of keeping millions of acres of forsts, often in difficult terrain, raked.

[Kidlicious]

The manpower required to rake the millions of acres of forests is also absurd. It would also be a fire (and forest health) problem in and of itself as forests would dry out faster with no mulch.

There was too much dead leaves. You seem to think it's beneficial to have an unlimited amount of dead leaves around

[Aeson]

That depends on how much combustible materials they leave around. Californians can not blame their failure on the climate.

In a deep enough drought the entire forest becomes combustible. What are they supposed to do? Clear cut all the forests? The grass fires that would result would happen more often.

Climate change, specifically the way the jet steam has been affected, is definitely increasing the duration of extreme weather (droughts included) events.

In any case, raking the forests is a stupid idea.

[Aeson]

There was too much dead leaves. You seem to think it's beneficial to have an unlimited amount of dead leaves around